|
Post by boscoe on Nov 29, 2007 15:42:32 GMT -5
@kokuruy: I don't consider a Rolex Sub a jewelry piece. It was the original tool watch, very rugged. Invicta's usual dive offerings don't compare (see my side by side between a Tudor Sub and the 9937 in Review and Reference). And, believe me, I'm not a defender of Rolex. I have a Reserve pro diver en route. I can't wait to see it.
|
|
timebender
disciple
Bending a few in time.
Posts: 200
|
Post by timebender on Nov 29, 2007 18:40:17 GMT -5
"One mans trash is another mans treasure"
$89 Invicta, $1000 Invicta, $12,000 Rolex. If the person that lays down the cash puts on one of the above and thinks, man, I really like that, then all is just fine.
Others would not enter into the pride the person had in his time piece.
Ain't it great, there is a bunch of watches out there for all. ;D
|
|
|
Post by shimside11 on Nov 30, 2007 0:46:07 GMT -5
Quite frankly I find the overal quality of the Invicta watches to be far above the Rolex watches - the Rolex watches are jewelry pieces not meant to be worn everyday (hence my piles of broken Rolex watches over time), but Invicta seems to be meant and designed to be worn and worn and worn some more - very sturdy. I'm not certain that I understand this post. Could you elaborate on your observations? How did the Rolex's get broken and which model Invicta's did you get that had that kind of exceptional quality? I'm just scratching my head and I'm genuinely curious as to how you arrived at your views
|
|
|
Post by Datsun240Z71 on Nov 30, 2007 6:56:58 GMT -5
Quite frankly I find the overal quality of the Invicta watches to be far above the Rolex watches - the Rolex watches are jewelry pieces not meant to be worn everyday (hence my piles of broken Rolex watches over time), but Invicta seems to be meant and designed to be worn and worn and worn some more - very sturdy. I'm not certain that I understand this post. Could you elaborate on your observations? How did the Rolex's get broken and which model Invicta's did you get that had that kind of exceptional quality? I'm just scratching my head and I'm genuinely curious as to how you arrived at your views Me too... I find it hard to take these posts seriously. He's already said (in numerous posts) that they were so disappointing that he gave his nephew Rolex watches to wear as beaters. I'd be happy to call him Uncle if he'd include me in that deal.
|
|
|
Post by gottahaveonion on Nov 30, 2007 20:48:34 GMT -5
rolex just has the chronometer market cornered ...concerning the sub they are way overpriced when u compare the other elite brand divers... they are thousands above those divers as well...my gf has many watches that cost 20k + which include 2 diamond rolex .... i catch her watching the watch shows on snbc more than i do.. btw u cant compare the diamonds but u sure do pay 4 them.
|
|
|
Post by boscoe on Dec 1, 2007 13:47:29 GMT -5
@onion: rolex is over-priced, IMHO. I think Omega makes a better timepiece - and at a more reasonable price, too.
|
|
|
Post by Triton on Dec 1, 2007 14:17:55 GMT -5
Ditto Boscoe
|
|
|
Post by 13echo on Dec 1, 2007 15:11:48 GMT -5
I appreciate the COSC divers as well as the less expensive watches Invicta produces. Time will tell if it is something that will become a larger part of the product lineup. I see subtle changes in the company in the last year. The website has had upgrades, there is more effort at least in the packaging to assure the customer that the watch has been inspected. The user manual is a much better version than the one I got with my first Invicta watch one year ago in December. I admire the success of Rolex as a company. That price point is not realistic for someone with my interests/priorities right now. I would rather spend 10k on a bike.
us vs. them?? / it never crossed my mind.
|
|